Ok. Except that I have done many things, and that's the basis of my criticisms. Were you accurately describing me, then I sure would be put in my place. But projected hypocrisy doesn't really phase me.
In fact, my father refused a bone marrow transplant and died, and that's what paid for the implementation funding in Bangladesh. Google Andrew Crawford (Andy) U of Mich engineering. d. 2001.
Not that this makes me a good person, as I did it because it was my pops death request and not because I cared about the poor devils in S. Asia. Although to be honest it's hard to go do such a thing and not leave hating the corruption and global system and aristo rulers that created such a hell for their own people.
Golly! I'm either an asshole because you've put your own words in my mouth, or I have a limited view of how quickly kids in Dhaka, Bangladesh pick up new technology? Ok Norway, you know all about working in third world slum conditions, and I'm naive. However interesting the fact that you and your droogs were coding in your cribs, this doesn't exactly convince me you know what you're talking about, nor demonstate the universal propositions that you think me naive for not believing despite years of first hand experience. Maybe the expat gang just hated me so much they wouldn't tell me where all the pre-teen programmers hung out.
At any rate, I think you answered my question; not about MIT, but certainly about the attitude and arrogance that might motivate their faith. Lack of documentation must have been a real burden. Good for you for overcoming such a handicap. If Roelvaarg were alive he'd write a novel...
I've audited charities in both Brazil and Bangladesh (mostly foreigners) Hopefully they will have more success. I don't personally agree that failing in ones first attempt is grounds to give up on those ones set out to help, but that's their karma, eh?
"This is exactly what the program is all about, giving the chance of training the kids. Do you have any idea how a preschool kid learn? If structured as a game, they adsorb everything (a language, how to use a computer etc). THey just need the proper input."
As I wrote, I meant. I met the president of Rosina and asked him explicitly what types of services they got and didn't get. His answer was people to teach the kids how to use the machines they already had. I know very well that Brazil is not all favelas, but that is where the MIT people went. I don't know why.
Regarding Dhaka. The government doesn't provide public schooling in the slums or villages. I DO know how preschool children learn when given the chance and the means. This isn't an option in Dhaka right now. I was part of a group of UMich engin students who spent four years building a token clinical healthcare system in Dhaka that would sustain itself. 86% of the 17,000 workers in our program were anemic. Most were young women in their teens with children of their own. There isn't daycare. There isn't preschool or elementary school. There aren't even squat toilets, just planks of wood! My point is that it is not enough to HOPE. Americans should, as you note, stay in the US unless they're going to finish what they promise.
And I agree. Probably MIT SHOULD go to New Orleans first, but I have not heard that that is under discussion. That's why I am skeptical.
This is a fair point. To what extent is it appropriate to ask for accountability from the ministers in famously corrupt countries. If the machines show up in retail stores, or are re-exported, how should MIT respond?
I understand the ideal and the sentiment, and no doubt in many places it'll work like a charm. But in one of the cities mentioned, Rio, they already have more than enough computers at the childrens center (in Rosina, the largest favela). The bosses of the favelas can't get people to risk the violence (which isn't even around the childrens center) to go give classes and training.
In Dhaka, another location I've heard mentioned, one of the industries is assembling computers. The problem there is that there's no sewers, no clean water, nothing in the slums (they walk through raw waste to go to work). There's a lot of decent coders there, as English is the administrative language, but for people in the slums??? There's no law there, and the children aren't educated at all. So for other than the upper middle class (which isn't much), the offer of machines that'll be sold or stolen is just exploiting their poverty.
I don't personally approve here unless there's more of a plan than hand outs for the cameras. The third world isn't a zoo, and unless the MIT people are going to go the full distance they shouldn't go period, as they'll cause more harm than good to the people they say they want to help.
I don't know one way or another whether they can provide $100 laptops to children in third world slums (MIT, right?).
BUT having spent a fair bit of time in some of the worst places on earth, including favelas and S. Asian slums... I can't see what makes them think this is a good idea. Maybe I'm cynical.
First, are all those people supposed to just magically pick up a computer and know how to use it? We're talking about very very poor people who make $1-2 a day and can't read or write on average. This fact can't have been lost on the MIT people, so what gives? I know for a fact that in Rio the problem in the favelas isn't getting their hands on computers, but rather getting instructors and teachers to come train kids how to use them. This sort of upsets me, as I really like Brazilians in general and it seems like when they explicitly ask for teachers rather than things, we should listen. Couldn't MIT do a training exchange program instead, or even at the same time?
Second. Handing a 10 or 12 year old slum kid in asia a computer worth a couple months salary isn't going to help him unless one has a way to make sure he can hold onto it. What's to stop the slum bosses from stealing all the machines that are handed out the moment the westerners leave? I've been hearing about this grand plan for a while, and it doesn't seem very well thought out.
The FCC just fined a woman who'd unknowingly rented out her garage to a couple guys that set up an unlicensed repeater without her knowledge. I've been looking for the article (www.cq-amateur-radio.com) and will post the link when I have more time to dig through my back issues. Obviously the Ham regs aren't the same as the rules that apply to the wi-fi band, but eventually the open hot-spots will be exploited with enough regularity to make it worth the Feds time to shift the burden over to the provider. Considering the FCC goes after farmers transmitting on empty bands so they can listen to music in their tractors, it's a pretty safe bet that as soon as podcasters figure out how to dodge power restrictions (or exploit any number of loopholes in corporate phone networks) that there will be a crackdown. If bar owners in NYC can be bullied into banning smoking via the threat of fines, what likelyhood is there that open access internet portals will be any braver?
I'd suggest that a version of the Public Access TV law that requires cable companies allocate a portion of their fees for the establisment of reserved channels for local and municipal government usage be extended to include mobile phone tower networks. This would shift the admin burden onto a local authority, which might be accused of sloth in enforcing access rules, but would only get a slap on the wrist compared to private portal providers.
Here's a link to a blog entry related to this subject at Michael Nielsen's blog.
http://www.qinfo.org/people/nielsen/blog/?p=172
In the comment section I provided links to some useful sources, including a now next to impossible to dig up paper out of EEEL on smoothing the metrics on Ion Traps.
Enjoy
guys,
There's a lot of conspiracy mongering and mininformation being spread around about Galileo and the GPS systems and how they work. Here's three links that should help address this:
Here's the link to NIST's time and freq. group.
http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/index.html
Here's the link to the United States Naval Observatory site, which oversee's the GPS system (with airspace commant).
http://www.usno.navy.mil/
And here's the link to the link farm of the ESA, or rather to the EU's overall scientific administrative body.
http://www.edpsciences.org/index.cfm?niv1=useful_l inks
For specific information about the Galileo project, search "ESA" "Galileo" and Technical specifications...
I posted more specific links on the difference between the Galileo and US GPS systems elsewhere on slashdot, in particular regarding the encryption schemes and hard science related to each systems operations.
Galileo relies on the L1 carrier freq. used by the US GPS system, but this carrier freq. is "public", and "degraded" by definition (the C/A, or Coarse Acquisiton, signal). This is NOT proprietary to the EU's Galileo system, and it's dishonest for the EU to sell it as such commercially. The dual and multi-channel navcom services that the EU claims it wants to commercially exploit are not designed independently of the L1 carrier signal that the US system offers to everyone (conditionally). Please, just check the sites above.
Thanks,
Grouchy
Slashdot Mirror
Ok. Except that I have done many things, and that's the basis of my criticisms. Were you accurately describing me, then I sure would be put in my place. But projected hypocrisy doesn't really phase me.
In fact, my father refused a bone marrow transplant and died, and that's what paid for the implementation funding in Bangladesh. Google Andrew Crawford (Andy) U of Mich engineering. d. 2001.
Not that this makes me a good person, as I did it because it was my pops death request and not because I cared about the poor devils in S. Asia. Although to be honest it's hard to go do such a thing and not leave hating the corruption and global system and aristo rulers that created such a hell for their own people.
Golly! I'm either an asshole because you've put your own words in my mouth, or I have a limited view of how quickly kids in Dhaka, Bangladesh pick up new technology? Ok Norway, you know all about working in third world slum conditions, and I'm naive. However interesting the fact that you and your droogs were coding in your cribs, this doesn't exactly convince me you know what you're talking about, nor demonstate the universal propositions that you think me naive for not believing despite years of first hand experience. Maybe the expat gang just hated me so much they wouldn't tell me where all the pre-teen programmers hung out.
At any rate, I think you answered my question; not about MIT, but certainly about the attitude and arrogance that might motivate their faith. Lack of documentation must have been a real burden. Good for you for overcoming such a handicap. If Roelvaarg were alive he'd write a novel...
If that is MIT's plan, then God bless.
I've audited charities in both Brazil and Bangladesh (mostly foreigners) Hopefully they will have more success. I don't personally agree that failing in ones first attempt is grounds to give up on those ones set out to help, but that's their karma, eh?
"This is exactly what the program is all about, giving the chance of training the kids. Do you have any idea how a preschool kid learn? If structured as a game, they adsorb everything (a language, how to use a computer etc). THey just need the proper input."
As I wrote, I meant. I met the president of Rosina and asked him explicitly what types of services they got and didn't get. His answer was people to teach the kids how to use the machines they already had. I know very well that Brazil is not all favelas, but that is where the MIT people went. I don't know why.
Regarding Dhaka. The government doesn't provide public schooling in the slums or villages. I DO know how preschool children learn when given the chance and the means. This isn't an option in Dhaka right now. I was part of a group of UMich engin students who spent four years building a token clinical healthcare system in Dhaka that would sustain itself. 86% of the 17,000 workers in our program were anemic. Most were young women in their teens with children of their own. There isn't daycare. There isn't preschool or elementary school. There aren't even squat toilets, just planks of wood! My point is that it is not enough to HOPE. Americans should, as you note, stay in the US unless they're going to finish what they promise.
And I agree. Probably MIT SHOULD go to New Orleans first, but I have not heard that that is under discussion. That's why I am skeptical.
This is a fair point. To what extent is it appropriate to ask for accountability from the ministers in famously corrupt countries. If the machines show up in retail stores, or are re-exported, how should MIT respond?
Shadow,
I understand the ideal and the sentiment, and no doubt in many places it'll work like a charm. But in one of the cities mentioned, Rio, they already have more than enough computers at the childrens center (in Rosina, the largest favela). The bosses of the favelas can't get people to risk the violence (which isn't even around the childrens center) to go give classes and training.
In Dhaka, another location I've heard mentioned, one of the industries is assembling computers. The problem there is that there's no sewers, no clean water, nothing in the slums (they walk through raw waste to go to work). There's a lot of decent coders there, as English is the administrative language, but for people in the slums??? There's no law there, and the children aren't educated at all. So for other than the upper middle class (which isn't much), the offer of machines that'll be sold or stolen is just exploiting their poverty.
I don't personally approve here unless there's more of a plan than hand outs for the cameras. The third world isn't a zoo, and unless the MIT people are going to go the full distance they shouldn't go period, as they'll cause more harm than good to the people they say they want to help.
I don't know one way or another whether they can provide $100 laptops to children in third world slums (MIT, right?).
BUT having spent a fair bit of time in some of the worst places on earth, including favelas and S. Asian slums... I can't see what makes them think this is a good idea. Maybe I'm cynical.
First, are all those people supposed to just magically pick up a computer and know how to use it? We're talking about very very poor people who make $1-2 a day and can't read or write on average. This fact can't have been lost on the MIT people, so what gives? I know for a fact that in Rio the problem in the favelas isn't getting their hands on computers, but rather getting instructors and teachers to come train kids how to use them. This sort of upsets me, as I really like Brazilians in general and it seems like when they explicitly ask for teachers rather than things, we should listen. Couldn't MIT do a training exchange program instead, or even at the same time?
Second. Handing a 10 or 12 year old slum kid in asia a computer worth a couple months salary isn't going to help him unless one has a way to make sure he can hold onto it. What's to stop the slum bosses from stealing all the machines that are handed out the moment the westerners leave? I've been hearing about this grand plan for a while, and it doesn't seem very well thought out.
The FCC just fined a woman who'd unknowingly rented out her garage to a couple guys that set up an unlicensed repeater without her knowledge. I've been looking for the article (www.cq-amateur-radio.com) and will post the link when I have more time to dig through my back issues. Obviously the Ham regs aren't the same as the rules that apply to the wi-fi band, but eventually the open hot-spots will be exploited with enough regularity to make it worth the Feds time to shift the burden over to the provider. Considering the FCC goes after farmers transmitting on empty bands so they can listen to music in their tractors, it's a pretty safe bet that as soon as podcasters figure out how to dodge power restrictions (or exploit any number of loopholes in corporate phone networks) that there will be a crackdown. If bar owners in NYC can be bullied into banning smoking via the threat of fines, what likelyhood is there that open access internet portals will be any braver?
I'd suggest that a version of the Public Access TV law that requires cable companies allocate a portion of their fees for the establisment of reserved channels for local and municipal government usage be extended to include mobile phone tower networks. This would shift the admin burden onto a local authority, which might be accused of sloth in enforcing access rules, but would only get a slap on the wrist compared to private portal providers.
Here's a link to a blog entry related to this subject at Michael Nielsen's blog. http://www.qinfo.org/people/nielsen/blog/?p=172 In the comment section I provided links to some useful sources, including a now next to impossible to dig up paper out of EEEL on smoothing the metrics on Ion Traps. Enjoy
guys, There's a lot of conspiracy mongering and mininformation being spread around about Galileo and the GPS systems and how they work. Here's three links that should help address this: Here's the link to NIST's time and freq. group. http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/index.html Here's the link to the United States Naval Observatory site, which oversee's the GPS system (with airspace commant). http://www.usno.navy.mil/ And here's the link to the link farm of the ESA, or rather to the EU's overall scientific administrative body. http://www.edpsciences.org/index.cfm?niv1=useful_l inks
For specific information about the Galileo project, search "ESA" "Galileo" and Technical specifications...
I posted more specific links on the difference between the Galileo and US GPS systems elsewhere on slashdot, in particular regarding the encryption schemes and hard science related to each systems operations.
Galileo relies on the L1 carrier freq. used by the US GPS system, but this carrier freq. is "public", and "degraded" by definition (the C/A, or Coarse Acquisiton, signal). This is NOT proprietary to the EU's Galileo system, and it's dishonest for the EU to sell it as such commercially. The dual and multi-channel navcom services that the EU claims it wants to commercially exploit are not designed independently of the L1 carrier signal that the US system offers to everyone (conditionally). Please, just check the sites above.
Thanks,
Grouchy